East Coast roads and Midwest roads Today airline pa.s.sengers flying over the eastern states and the Midwest can look down and see a clear change in the pattern of the roads. East of the Appalachians, the roads generally conform to geographic features. In the Midwest, where the Northwest Ordinance was implemented using the method proposed by Jefferson, they conform primarily to a right-angled grid, positioned northsouth by eastwest. While Jefferson's influence on the American map can be difficult to detect, in that grid of roadways we can see his literal imprint on the United States.

CALIFORNIA, OREGON, NEVADA, IDAHO, UTAH.

JOHN MEARES.

The U.S. Line from Spanish Canada

The Spaniards have seized three British vessels in the fur trade at ... Nootka Sound, on the western coast of North America.... Their crews are sent to Mexico in irons.... [The incident] has been transmitted and presented to the government by a Mr. Meares, who came home a pa.s.senger.

-LONDON CHRONICLE, MAY 1, 1790 A multistate boundary line separating the southern ends of Oregon and Idaho from the northern ends of California, Nevada, and much of Utah owes its existence to both Spanish Canada and China. Canada is not typically thought of as Spanish, nor are American state lines usually connected to Chinese influence. But a glance at a map of Canada's Vancouver Island reveals remnants of Spanish Canada in names such as the Juan de Fuca Strait, Flores Island, Cortes Island, and Estevan Point.

Spain, as the first European nation to plant its flag in the New World, proclaimed that it owned it all. And from 1492 into the early 1600s, it did. But then other nations began infiltrating uninhabited coves and bays along the New World's Atlantic coast and Caribbean islands. By the late 1700s, foreign infiltration also began on the western coast, as China became more open to European trade. One of the most valuable exports to China was the l.u.s.trous fur of the sea otter. Enter the adventurous English sea merchant, John Meares.

Line and remnants of Spanish Canada John Meares (ca. 1756-1809) (photo credit 10.1) From obscure origins, Meares struggled his way up the ropes of British seafaring to its top knots. Born in the mid-1750s in or near the town of Bath, he joined the Royal Navy at fifteen as a cabin boy. By the end of the American Revolution, he had shown enough intelligence and skill to rise to the rank of lieutenant. With the war's end, however, his service was no longer needed. Meares needed to find a new avenue to wealth and fame. Quite possibly he found it by reading the newspapers. "The importance of Botany Bay will appear by all who examine Capt. Cook's chart of his discoveries," London's Evening Post wrote in 1786. "Its situation is well adapted for carrying on a trade between Nootka Sound and Cook's River on the American coast, and the islands of j.a.pan and the Chinese Empire, in sea otter skins." Botany Bay (present-day Sydney, Australia) was but one of British naval captain James Cook's discoveries in the Pacific Ocean. In 1778 he discovered a way station for ships crossing that vast ocean en route to North America. The way station was a chain of tiny islands now known as Hawaii. It too would figure into Meares's plans.

England was not the only nation reaping the riches of lands newly discovered by Europeans. All of Europe, joined now by the fledgling United States, elbowed for opportunities. But Spain remained the best positioned, having been the first to establish settlements and naval forces in these regions. Evidence of Spain's power even permeated the previously cited news item, when it referred to the importance of Cook's River and Nootka Sound on the American West Coast but made no mention of San Francisco, Los Angeles, or San Diego. Those better-known locations were controlled by Spain. (Seattle was yet to be discovered by Europeans.) Though Spain had lain claim to all the Americas, and its explorers had ventured throughout the Pacific Northwest, identifying their claims by the Spanish names they gave them, it had not sought to settle the northernmost regions. History might have been different indeed had Spain learned there was gold in the Yukon and Alaska. As it was, Spain saw little profit to be reaped from the region and great expense in protecting it, since it was some 600 miles from its nearest available naval harbor at San Francisco.

On the other hand, Spain was well aware of profits to be had from trade with China. Early on it had established a Pacific base for such commerce by colonizing the Philippines. Spain was also well aware when China became an open market for sea otter furs, and it acted immediately to stop other nations from establishing trading posts along the coast of the sea otter's habitat in the Pacific Northwest.

Into these waters John Meares set sail from Calcutta in 1786 on the first of his two voyages to the Northwest. His plan was to establish a permanent trading post for sea otter furs, which he would trade in China for goods to be sold in England. Meares was a raw newcomer, never having headed a commercial enterprise, nor commanded a ship. His apparent self-confidence, coupled with an independent streak, is revealed by the fact that neither of his two voyages was licensed by the East India Company-a risky move on his part. Just as Spain had sought to monopolize its discovery of the New World, so too did the British East India Company seek to monopolize its markets by prohibiting other Englishmen from engaging in trade with its markets.

For his first voyage, Meares arranged financial backing to secure two ships, which he named the Nootka and the Sea Otter. With himself in command of the Nootka, and a fellow navy lieutenant, William Tipping, commanding the Sea Otter, the two ships left India in March, 1786. Tipping's Sea Otter, carrying opium, sold its cargo in Southeast Asia before setting a course for the Northwest. There the two ships were to rendezvous, if they had not met up already.1 Meares arrived at Cook's River, in present-day Alaska, in August. He began trading with the natives for furs and learned that Tipping's Sea Otter was just ahead of him. Meares followed in its direction, continuing to trade along the way. As winter weather approached, Meares had yet to acquire a full cargo. He had three choices. He could depart for China (as the Sea Otter apparently had done) but with fewer furs than he wanted. He could harbor for the winter in Alaska and resume trading when warmer weather returned. Or he could winter at the way station discovered and described by Captain Cook: Hawaii.

Meares feared that his crew would never leave the tropical paradise described by Cook, and he also feared the financial consequences of returning with inadequate cargo. What he didn't fear was the Alaskan winter ... because he had no clue of what it was. Few if any Europeans did. Just how bad did an Alaskan winter turn out to be? Newsworthy bad. "The Nootka ... arrived at Oonalaska the beginning of August and arrived in Prince William's Sound the end of September," the London World reported in October 1787. "By the severity of the winter they lost their 3rd and 4th Mates, Surgeon, Boatswain, Carpenter, and Cooper and twelve of the foremast men; and the remainder were so enfeebled as to be under the necessity of applying to the Commanders of the King George and Queen Charlotte, who just at this time arrived."

The rescue of Meares and his crew by the King George and Queen Charlotte was not particularly cordial. Both ships were licensed by the East India Company. From their point of view, Meares and his men were poaching. Their captains demanded that Meares pledge a 1,000 bond against his promise not to engage in any trade en route back to India, and that he turn over the metal and beads he was using to trade with the natives. In return, they provided Meares and his men with the bare necessities.

The news of Meares's rescue was followed a week later by news of his venture's sister ship. A brief item in the London World reported, "The Sea Otter, Capt. Tipping, sailed from Calcutta a few days after the Nootka ... and arrived in Prince William's Sound in September.... She left the Sound the day after, supposed for Cook's River ... but having never since been seen or heard of, there can be little doubt of her being lost."

Once rescued, Meares and his crew set sail for Hawaii, where they replenished themselves and then went on to Macau, a Portuguese colony on the coast of China. Meares sold what cargo he had and his badly damaged ship, then immediately started in again. In less than two months, he had arranged financing for two other ships. To protect himself from the East India Company, he contracted to sail from Guangzhou (Canton), China, for a Portuguese merchant, enabling his ships to fly Portugal's flag. Meares also protected his men against winter on this second voyage-and commenced his larger plan-by having his crew construct a permanent trading post in Nootka Sound. The one thing Meares was not protected against was Spain, whose ships soon entered Nootka Sound, where they too were arriving to establish a fur trade with China.

Meares himself had already departed with his newly acquired cargo, leaving behind a staff of Chinese craftsmen and seamen who, in addition to having constructed the trading post, had also constructed a ship, the North West America, as the next step in the expansion of Meares's enterprise. It was to sail under the command of one of the few Englishmen left to oversee operations at Nootka. Because of the presence of these Englishmen, the arriving Spaniards needed neither hounds nor accountants to sniff out British control of these Chinese settlers working for a Portuguese merchant. What happened next, Meares later reported to Parliament, was that "on the 9th of June, [the North West America] was boarded and seized by boats manned and equipped for war, commanded by Don [Esteban Jose] Martinez, that he did ... take possession of her in the name of his Catholic Majesty.... that the commander of the N. W. America, his officers and men, were accordingly made prisoners ... and some of her men were ... afterwards put in irons."2 Public response in England to Meares's carefully worded report was one of outrage. "The Court of Spain cannot be so devoid of understanding as to make a serious quarrel with this country upon so idle and ill-founded a pretence as her hitherto unheard of claim to the sovereignty of the seas to the northwestward of America," London's Woodfall's Register exclaimed in 1790. "The Court of Madrid might, with as much reason, lay claim to the clouds, the stars, and the hemisphere."

Not unlike today, the clamor was quickly exploited. Within a month, London's Covent Garden Theatre had presented a topical play ent.i.tled Nootka Sound, or England Prepared. British militants accused Spain of creating a crisis to divert its people's attention from democratic movements in other nations. In response, British peace advocates reminded their fellow citizens about the profitless war with Spain that had resulted from Robert Jenkins's dubious account of a Spaniard lopping off his ear.3 (See "Robert Jenkins's Ear" earlier in this book.) Ultimately, England and Spain did not go to war. Instead, they signed an accord known as the Nootka Convention, which would later affect the locations of California, Nevada, and Utah's borders with Oregon and Idaho. Under the Nootka Convention, Spain accepted the principle that a nation could not claim possession of land simply by having discovered it; rather, a nation must have established a permanent settlement on the land.

Nearly thirty years later, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams invoked the Nootka Convention in negotiations with Spain regarding the western boundaries of the Louisiana Purchase. By that time, an American settlement had been established at the mouth of the Columbia River in present-day Oregon. Adams cited that settlement as the basis for a border with Spain's California settlements.4 Spain did not challenge Adams's logic, though its representative quibbled with the boundary he proposed. Adams noted in his diary, "I showed him ... the line offered in my note, upon which he only remarked that we might have taken the Columbia River from its source to its mouth, instead of the forty-first parallel of lat.i.tude." In the 1819 Adams-Onis treaty that resulted, the boundary was fixed at the 42nd parallel. North of this parallel, virtually all the waterways flow to the Columbia River; south of it, virtually all flow to what was then Spain's settlement at San Francisco.

42: the watershed line But England also invoked the Nootka Convention, claiming its right to possess Oregon, based on British settlements along the Columbia River and the waterways leading to it. Having just concluded the War of 1812, neither the United States nor England wanted to renew hostilities, so the two nations agreed jointly to hold Oregon, which at the time extended to Alaska. This joint occupancy lasted some twenty-five years, at which point an American rallying cry for the region-"Fifty-Four Forty or Fight!"-once again brought the United States and England to the brink of war during the presidency of James Polk.

As for John Meares, he went on to undertake what many in his situation would do today: he wrote a book.5 His adventures on the frozen seas with enemies from Spain and bullies from the British East India Company, combined with the tropical splendors of natives in Hawaii and the mysteries of Canton, made the book a longtime favorite of many readers. One dissatisfied reader, however, was George Dixon, who had captained one of the East India Company ships that had rescued Meares. Dixon took offense at being depicted as an extortionist. So he wrote a book, too: This Day is published, price 3s.6d Further Remarks on the Voyages of John Meares, Esq.

in which several important facts, misrepresented in the voyages, relative to geography and commerce, are fully substantiated. Likewise is inserted a letter from Captain DUNCAN containing a decisive refutation of several unfounded a.s.sertions of Mr. MEARES, and finally a reply to his answer.

By Captain GEORGE DIXON6 Meares, meanwhile, returned to active duty in the navy, where he was promoted to commander and with it received a substantial salary. George III proclaimed him a baronet, enabling him to be Sir John Meares. With his military rank, a hereditary t.i.tle, and his book still being issued and advertised, Meares returned to his hometown of Bath in 1796 and got married. He had achieved all he sought.

With his success, Meares disappeared from the public stage. His death in 1809 went unremarked by any known obituary. Still, his name remains engraved on the map in Meares Island, British Columbia, and Cape Meares, Oregon.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, MARYLAND, VIRGINIA.

BENJAMIN BANNEKER.

To Be Brilliant and Black in the New Nation

Benjamin Banneker, the sooty astronomer ... is to be a.s.sociated with our Genevese money-changer [Swiss-born Treasury Secretary Albert Gallatin] for the purpose of "correcting" some part of this foreigner's "procedure." ... The African scholar, if he could correct nothing else, might very easily correct Mr. Gallatin's English; nay, if Banneker had just arrived from the Gold Coast or the kingdom of Whidau, he would be superior to our imported financier.

-THE PORT-FOLIO, AUGUST 22, 1801 The largest historic site in Washington, DC, seen by more people (albeit unaware) than any other, commemorates the eighteenth-century work of a free African American named Benjamin Banneker. The site is the city's northern and southeastern boundary line, separating the District of Columbia from Maryland, which was surveyed by Banneker and Andrew Ellicott. Signs at the site, however, currently say only "Welcome to Washington-Cell Phones Illegal While Driving," without explaining how, in 1791, an African American got hired for such a prestigious a.s.signment.

Banneker was not only a surveyor, which entailed a mastery of mathematics and astronomy. He was also a clockmaker, the author of the most widely published almanac of his day, and even a bit of a poet.1 Mostly, however, he was a tobacco farmer. For the first sixty years of his life, he cultivated his crop in a spa.r.s.ely populated area west of Baltimore, located between what later became Catonsville and Ellicott City.

Banneker was thirty-one years old when the Ellicott family arrived in the area and met the African American on the adjacent farm. Twelve-year-old George Ellicott was fascinated by the functioning clock Banneker had carved out of wood, based on his observations of a pocket watch. Banneker was likewise fascinated by young Ellicott's newly learned mathematical insights, and delighted in the books the boy began to lend him. The Ellicotts had moved to Maryland from Pennsylvania, where they were part of a highly respected Quaker family, among whose members were a clockmaker, several surveyors, and an author of an almanac. Given the family's influence, perhaps it is not surprising that Banneker too became a surveyor and the author of an almanac.

Since slavery was integral to Maryland's economy, how did Banneker come to be a free man and the owner of a farm? His father, Robert, had been a slave until offered his freedom as an incentive for hard work. He toiled with a vigor that remained even after his liberation and marriage to Mary Bannka. Robert took his wife's last name because her father, too, had been a slave, whose African name was Bannka. When Bannka had been brought to America, he was purchased by Molly Walsh, who turned out to know a thing or two about involuntary servitude. Molly had been convicted of stealing milk when she was a teenager in England and sentenced to seven years as an indentured servant in the colonies. After serving her period of bondage in Maryland, she farmed a small plot of wilderness land that she was able to rent. In time Molly earned enough to purchase two slaves. She did not, however, impose English names on them, and after two or three years she granted both their freedom. Then she married Bannka.2 Benjamin Banneker (1731-1806) (photo credit 11.1) After Molly and Bannka's daughter married Robert, the young couple took on the farm work, while Molly took on the task of educating her grandson, Benjamin, and his younger sisters. For a brief period, Benjamin attended a nearby Quaker school (the Quakers being not only abolitionists but continually in the forefront of equal rights). As with most rural children in that era, Benjamin stopped attending school once he was old enough to a.s.sist his parents on the farm. In time Robert and Mary purchased additional acreage, the records reflecting their name often being listed as Banneker. As his parents aged and his sisters married, Benjamin took over the farm.

Despite his relationship with his Quaker neighbors, Banneker's journal reveals that he was as vulnerable as other African Americans at that time and for centuries to come. On December 18, 1790, he recorded, "x.x.xx.x.x informed me that x.x.xx.x.x stole my horse and great coat, and that the said x.x.xx.x.x intended to murder me when opportunity presented and further gave me caution to let no person in my house after dark."3 If Banneker had been white, he could have taken this information to the sheriff. Rather than report it, he later carefully crossed out all the names in this entry, fearing what might happen should his journal fall into the wrong hands.

Still, in other segments of society, being black could be an a.s.set, albeit sometimes as an oddity. Though no publisher accepted Banneker's first almanac in 1791, some considered it at length, thinking there might be interest in mathematical calculations performed by an African American. Through George Ellicott, now thirty-eight years old, Banneker's unpublished almanac came to the attention of the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery, one of whose members was George's cousin, the prominent surveyor Andrew Ellicott.

Banneker commenced preparing an almanac for the following year. Andrew Ellicott, meanwhile, started work on his recently received commission to survey the boundary of the newly created District of Columbia. To a.s.sist him in this task, he offered a position to his fellow surveyor and cousin, George. George, however, was unable to accept the offer and suggested Benjamin Banneker.

Politics in the eighteenth century being no different than politics now, Andrew Ellicott aimed to protect his posterior before making such a righteous choice. He sought the approval of President Washington's secretary of state, Thomas Jefferson-a shrewd move, since Jefferson's views on race were conflicted but his political ambitions were not. Jefferson approved the choice.

The wisdom of Ellicott's marshaling support soon became evident. During the course of the project, Ellicott lodged at various inns; Banneker slept at the base camp, since few if any local inns would provide accommodations to African Americans. Even in camp, Banneker ate his meals separately from the other members of the engineering corps. Without Jefferson's approval, Banneker's very presence on the project may well have been rejected.

Ellicott himself, however, regarded Banneker as a colleague. He placed him in charge of the astronomical instruments and asked him to perform the mathematical calculations. Ellicott supervised the field measurements. The city whose boundaries they were to locate was a square with ten-mile sides, occupying land on both sides of the Potomac River and encompa.s.sing the ports of Georgetown on the north bank and Alexandria on the south bank. Today, that part of the original city south of the Potomac is no longer part of Washington, DC, having been returned to Virginia in 1846. (See "Robert M. T. Hunter" in this book.) Banneker's work on the survey made him an instant celebrity, since his achievement was of value to people in influential positions. First and foremost were the abolitionists, whose arguments against slavery were greatly strengthened by examples of the intellectual equality of African Americans. Even while the survey was under way, a meeting of the Maryland chapter of the Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery heard a report regarding "an almanac for the year 1792, the astronomical calculations thereof performed by Benjamin Banneker, a black man, a descendant of African parents. The calculations appear to be attested by a number of respectable characters as very accurate."4 With the publicity generated by the society, printers were now more confident that an almanac created by an African American would sell well. They were wrong; it sold very well.

Banneker, his golden opportunity at hand, then did an extraordinary thing. He sent a copy of his almanac to Thomas Jefferson, but his cover letter said not a single word about his almanac. It spoke instead about slavery. After noting how, under the rule of the king, Americans had experienced a kind of enslavement, Banneker went on to say: Your abhorrence thereof was so excited that you publicly held forth this true and invaluable doctrine, which is worthy to be recorded and remembered in all succeeding ages, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, and that among these are, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." ... But, Sir, how pitiable is it to reflect, that although you were so fully convinced of the benevolence of the Father of Mankind, and of His equal and impartial distribution of these rights and privileges, which He hath conferred upon them, that you should at the same time counteract His mercies, in detaining by fraud and violence so numerous a part of my brethren.5 The fact that Banneker wrote to Jefferson suggests that he was as keen an observer of politics as he was of planets and stars. Having witnessed Andrew Ellicott seeking Jefferson's support for his appointment, Banneker knew that the present political constellation made Jefferson an ideal ally. Less than two weeks later, Banneker received the following letter: Sir, I thank you sincerely for your letter of the 19th instant and for the almanac it contained. n.o.body wishes more than I do to see such proofs as you exhibit, that nature has given to our black brethren, talents equal to those of the other colors of men, and that the appearance of a want of them is owing merely to the degraded condition of their existence, both in Africa & America. I can add with truth, that n.o.body wishes more ardently to see a good system commenced for raising the condition both of their body & mind to what it ought to be, as fast as the imbecility of their present existence, and other circ.u.mstances which cannot be neglected, will admit. I have taken the liberty of sending your almanac to Monsieur de Condorcet, Secretary of the Academy of Sciences at Paris, and member of the Philanthropic society, because I considered it as a doc.u.ment to which your whole color had a right for their justification against the doubts which have been entertained of them. I am with great esteem, Sir Your most obed't humble serv't., Thomas Jefferson6 Banneker and the abolitionist societies recognized the immense value of Jefferson's letter-as no doubt Jefferson did in writing it. The two letters immediately appeared in pamphlets and newspapers throughout the country. The publicity led to Banneker's 1793 almanac outselling all its compet.i.tors, and the 1794 edition outselling that of 1793.

But fame did not eliminate the racial abuses that Banneker faced. Too old to continue working his land, he rented it out to small farmers in the area. Often they refused to pay the rent and on occasion threatened him over the matter. He noted that on August 27, 1797, "Standing by my door, I heard the discharge of a gun, and in 4 or 5 seconds of time after the discharge, the small shot came rattling about me, one or two of which struck the house, which plainly demonstrates that the velocity of sound as much greater than that of a cannon-bullet."7 Possibly the incident was an accident, not an act of intimidation. That the entry is ambiguous may itself be a clue to the experience of being black at that time and place. Does Banneker's observation about the velocity of sound reflect his fascination with science even when his life was in danger? Or does it reflect how, for the sake of safety, he disguised his recording of a racist event in scientific garb?

Likewise, what others wrote about Banneker reveals how one's true feelings about race could be just as difficult to know then as they often are today. The same year that the bullet was fired into Banneker's home, The Time Piece & Literary Companion published a satiric article, purporting to be the last will and testament of one Peter Porcupine. It included the curious-to-decipher bequest, "Should the said Thomas Jefferson survive Banneker, the almanac maker, I request he will get the brains of the said philomath carefully dissected, to satisfy the world in what respects they differ from a white man."

Benjamin Banneker could not satisfy the world. But he could cope with it. And prevail.

OHIO, INDIANA, MICHIGAN, ILLINOIS, WISCONSIN, MINNESOTA.

JESSE HAWLEY.

The Erie Ca.n.a.l and the Gush of Redrawn Lines

The common purpose of government is protection. But can it not be made to do more?... To the cultivation of the arts of peace, we have to ask our government to adopt another principle: that of a nation's wealth ... is best promoted by applying the surplus revenue of the state to internal improvements, roads, ca.n.a.ls, &c.

-JESSE HAWLEY1 Jesse Hawley contributed to the location of more state lines than any other individual except Stephen A. Douglas. But Hawley did it from jail. In 1807 he published a book-length series of fourteen newspaper essays while cooling his financially overextended heels in debtors' prison in Canandaigua, New York. The essays detailed the means by which the Great Lakes could be connected to the Hudson River and, via the Hudson, to the Atlantic. Doing so would have an incredible result, according to Hawley, who predicted with astonishing accuracy that "the trade of almost all the lakes in North America ... would center at New York.... In a century its island would be covered with the buildings and population of its city."2 Hawley was not the first to speculate on a waterway connecting the hinterland to the Hudson. As early as 1724, surveyor Cadwallader Colden wrote of the potential for waterways connecting New York's Mohawk River, which flows into the Hudson, to the Great Lakes: Many of the branches of the river Mississippi come so near to the branches of several of the rivers which empty themselves into the Great Lakes, that in several places there is but a short land-carriage from one to the other.... If one considers the [Mohawk] river and its numerous branches, he must say that, by means of this river and the lakes, there is opened to view such a scene of inland navigation as cannot be paralleled in any other part of the world.3 In addition to the extraordinary commercial advantages of connecting the Hudson to the Great Lakes, Colden also emphasized its national security value-from the point of view of England before the Revolutionary War. He argued that the French, who had come to control the vast swath surrounding the Mississippi River, the Great Lakes, and the St. Lawrence River, "plainly showed their intention of enclosing the British settlements."

National security remained an important element when Hawley published his 1807 essays, but from a substantially changed perspective. The St. Lawrence still belonged to another nation, but now that nation was England, which had conquered French Canada in 1763. And while the Mississippi River was now entirely within the United States, owing to the Louisiana Purchase, that same purchase triggered a growing fear that someday the lower half of the Mississippi might also be part of another nation composed of the American slave states.

Between Colden's report to the colonial governor of New York and Hawley's newspaper series, numerous others had discussed aspects of what was to become the Erie Ca.n.a.l. Hawley's essays revealed that his pa.s.sion for the topic had recently been augmented when Thomas Jefferson, in his second inaugural address, urged "an amendment to the Const.i.tution [enabling surplus funds to] be applied in time of peace to rivers, ca.n.a.ls, roads, arts, manufactures, education, and other great objects within each state." Amendment to the Const.i.tution? Indeed, the Const.i.tution limits Congress to funding internal improvements only if they are roadways that convey mail or provide access to forts; it specifically prohibits Congress from acts that favor commerce in one state over any other. Apparently, Jefferson's vision differed from that of the other Founding Fathers.

Jefferson's views on the role of the federal government inspired not only Hawley but also others who contemplated a ca.n.a.l connecting the Great Lakes to the Hudson.4 New York State a.s.semblyman Joshua Forman met with President Jefferson in 1809, seeking federal funds for the New York ca.n.a.l. But even Jefferson's jaw dropped. "You talk of making a ca.n.a.l of 350 miles through the wilderness!" he told Forman. "It is little short of madness to think of it at this day."5 Jesse Hawley (1773-1842) (photo credit 12.1) Erie Ca.n.a.l: significant rivers Jefferson's insights into madness proved to be limited. Hawley's essays provided so much detail regarding the project's geography, hydrology, and cost that they became the introductory textbook for those joining with Forman to undertake the building of the Erie Ca.n.a.l. Hawley himself was not an engineer. Nor was he a surveyor, wealthy patrician, military man, or even a college graduate. He was just a middle-cla.s.s flour merchant. His pa.s.sion regarding the ca.n.a.l was so intense because the absence of such a waterway had landed him in debtors' prison.

Jesse Hawley had been born and raised in Connecticut, a sixth-generation American whose father was a carpenter. As an adult he migrated westward for the economic opportunities that beckoned to those in New England's coastal regions, where the growing population limited one's options. In western New York, Hawley became a flour merchant, milling wheat and shipping it east via waterways being made navigable by the Western Inland Company. Though the shipping costs devoured his profits, the Western Inland Company had declared its commitment to further improvements along the rivers that would reduce the cost of shipping. But the company changed its policy on waterways, causing Hawley's business to sink. Unable to pay his debts, Hawley was arrested in 1806. A friend posted bail. Hawley then jumped bail and went where he felt he would never be found: Pittsburgh.

While on the lam, Hawley published his initial essay using a pseudonym. To his credit, guilt over having jumped bail brought him back to New York, where he was sentenced to twenty months in debtors' prison. There, expanding his initial writing, Hawley continued to publish under his pseudonym, now fearing that readers would dismiss his ideas if they knew the author was in debtors' prison.6 The projected ca.n.a.l was, after all, so grand that many Americans dismissed the idea even when proposed by worthies such as State a.s.semblyman Forman, former U.S. senator (and Const.i.tution coauthor) Gouverneur Morris, and future New York governor DeWitt Clinton. Clinton relied heavily on Hawley's essays when, as governor, he got the state legislature to appropriate $7 million to create what opponents called "Clinton's Ditch." The governor committed his subsequent career to the Erie Ca.n.a.l and, after its completion and enormous success, continued to credit Hawley as the foremost progenitor of the project.

While commercial benefit was the primary reason for building the Erie Ca.n.a.l, there were two related factors that were also of great importance. One involved national security; the other, internal security.

Prominent New Yorker William Cooper (founder of Cooperstown and father of James Fenimore Cooper) connected the ca.n.a.l's economic benefits to national security when he wrote of the Great Lakes region: "The trade of this vast country must be divided between Montreal and New York, and the half of it lost to the United States unless an inland communication can be formed from Lake Erie to the Hudson."7 Trade would be lost to the United States because it had to rely on the St. Lawrence River in Canada. The Treaty of Paris, which ended the American Revolution, guaranteed England free navigation of the Mississippi River but made no mention of American rights to navigate the St. Lawrence. Indeed, Americans did not enjoy smooth sailing on that river. Prior to Hawley's essays, the Senate considered legislation authorizing the president to acquire "by negotiation, or otherwise, as he may deem most expedient," free navigation along the St. Lawrence.

But the British were not the only impediment to navigation on the St. Lawrence. Boulders, rapids, and, in the winter, ice also hindered that waterway connecting Lake Ontario to the Atlantic. Canadians, equally aware of the vast market to be tapped by connecting the Great Lakes to the sea began to create their own series of ca.n.a.ls.8 The Erie Ca.n.a.l also represented a means of further uniting the states. Despite the failure of the Articles of Confederation, which loosely linked the states, many Americans continued to cling to that doc.u.ment's distrust of a national government. An 1822 article in the influential North American Review said of the idea of an Erie Ca.n.a.l: It connects the east with the west by a reciprocal and advantageous commerce ... and thus a strong but mutual interest will ultimately unite them with a chain which neither the fervors of party nor the mutual jealousy of state will ever be able to destroy.... The union of the states is our only safety.... Remove it, give an absolute independence to every state, and the promise of our youth is blasted, and with it the world's best hope laid low.

The Great Lakes, if given access to the sea, would become more than lakes; they would become major avenues of commerce. Ill.u.s.trating this fact on the American map, five states today have boundaries that were adjusted to provide access to the Great Lakes.

The boundary adjustment that most clearly reveals a state reaching for the Great Lakes was the tab at the western end of Pennsylvania's northern border. But this adjustment cannot be ascribed to Jesse Hawley's influence, since it occurred in a 1785 agreement between Pennsylvania and New York, more than twenty years before Hawley's essays appeared. It was, however, after Cadwallader Colden's report regarding connecting Lake Erie to the Hudson, and the numerous editions of his report published in the mid-eighteenth century indicate the high level of interest in the prospect of such a waterway.

That interest also contributed to Ohio's boundary adjustment in 1805, though in this case Ohio's primary goal was to possess the entirety of its western river, the Maumee. That goal could only have been augmented by the fact that the segment of the Maumee originally located in Michigan was its outlet on Lake Erie at Toledo. Congress allowed Ohio to adjust its border with Michigan to include this port. If this irked Michigan, the territory was too spa.r.s.ely populated for its irk to be heard. But after the Erie Ca.n.a.l was built, its irk grew into fury. The land that had been transferred to Ohio was now so valuable it sparked the Toledo War (see "Stevens T. Mason" in this book).

Border adjustments for Great Lakes access After the publication of Hawley's essays, Indiana's boundary with Michigan was moved north to give it access to the Great Lakes at Gary. Illinois's boundary with Wisconsin was moved north to give it access at Chicago. And Minnesota's boundary with Wisconsin was moved east from the Mississippi to the St. Croix River to give Minnesota access to the Great Lakes at Duluth.

While the impact of Hawley's writing was thus surfacing on the map, Hawley himself went back to being the businessman he used to be. "Notice is hereby given that ... the subscribers have been duly appointed as a.s.signees of Jesse Hawley, an insolvent debtor," a legal notice in a Canandaigua, New York, newspaper stated in 1812. "Creditors of the said insolvent [are] to appear at Freeman At.w.a.ter's inn ... on Tuesday the 19th of May at ten o'clock A.M. ... to receive a dividend (if there be any) of the said insolvent's estate." Hawley managed this bankruptcy in a way that avoided debtors' prison, though his financial difficulties may have contributed to disputes he had with his sisters, his in-laws, and his wife, from whom he eventually was divorced-an unusual recourse in that era.

But he kept bouncing back. In 1817 DeWitt Clinton's election as governor resulted in Hawley being appointed collector of revenue for the port of Genesee, New York. Three years later, he was elected to the New York State a.s.sembly on the coattails of Governor Clinton. Two years after that, when Clinton was not renominated, neither was Hawley.

Though Hawley's prominence had been confined primarily to New York-and, within New York, to those involved in the legislation enabling the creation of the ca.n.a.l-he did have one brief moment in the national spotlight. It occurred on October 26, 1825: "The columns of the New York papers are filled to overflowing with the particulars of the grand celebration of the event of finishing the Erie Ca.n.a.l," the New Hampshire Statesman reported. "Jesse Hawley, of Rochester, in behalf of the visitors, made a congratulatory address, which was replied to by Judge [Joshua] Forman, in behalf of the citizens of Buffalo. On a discharge of cannon, the boat started in fine style, drawn by four horses."

Jesse Hawley died in January 1842. In his one-time hometown of Rochester, New York, his obituary consisted of three sentences. In Albany, the terminus of the Erie Ca.n.a.l, four sentences were devoted to his pa.s.sing. But in Milwaukee, of all places, two full-page columns were devoted to his memory.9 The length and location of these obits reflect Hawley's impact on the nation. Rochester, a port on Lake Ontario, and Albany, a port on the Hudson River, were prosperous before the ca.n.a.l was created. But Milwaukee, a port on Lake Michigan, would likely not have existed without the Erie Ca.n.a.l. Not until several months after ground was broken for the ca.n.a.l did the American Fur Company form a settlement in what is now Milwaukee.

The Erie Ca.n.a.l remains in use to this day despite the subsequent development of railroads and interstate highways. While it transports far less cargo than during its heyday, it has remained a shipping channel even after the United States and Canada created the St. Lawrence Seaway in 1959. Jointly operated by both nations, the seaway annually transports more than 200 million tons of cargo between the Great Lakes and the Atlantic.

NORTH CAROLINA, GEORGIA.

JAMES BRITTAIN.

The Man History Tried to Erase

Raise as many Militia of your Battalion as you shall think necessary and pursue [the Georgians] from place to place ... until you have taken their Leaders, if possible, and show them that we have law sufficient to suppress unruly Citizens.